Tha Phantom Victims of 911, Part 2

     In the first part of this series, I presented an edited version of an interview with Phil Jayhan and Larry Williams.  On those audio clips, Jayhan and Williams point out that there were an inordinate number of millionaires, billionaires, and other politically well-connected individuals on the that allegedly were hijacked on September 11, 2001.   I pointed out that they made errors in logic in that they assumed that, if the deaths on the airliners were faked, the deaths at the Pentagon and the World Trade Center must also have been faked.  

     From what I've read of the Let's Roll Forums since then, there's reason to suspect that Let's Roll Forums is part of an MSM disinformation campaign.   Whether the suspicion is correct, however, doesn't disqualify information that they present.  Most of what disinformation agents present is true because an abundance of true statements tends to give credibility to the lies they tell.  Even Hitler was quoted as saying, "Tell the truth as often as you can; so that, when you lie, you're more likely to be believed."

     Regardless of whether Let's Roll Forums is a disinfo site or a sincere effort to uncover the truth, it's the reader who bears responsibility for assigning credibility.  When I presented the first part of this series, I admitted that I hadn't investigated their claims but saw their claims as important enough to pass along to you for your consideration.

     Today, I'm presenting the rest of the clips I developed from their four-hour-long, two interviews.  In the first of these, they suggest that flight attendants Carolyn Mayer Beug and Barbara Arestegui did not exist. 

      In the next clip, they point to several anomalies concerning Mark Bingham and Todd Beamer, supposedly on Flight 93.  You're probably familiar with several.  Jayhan and Williams point to yet another: the peculiar behavior of Bingham's "mother" on Good Morning, America.  They way they put it, she smiled all the way through the interview, "looking more like a nervous actress than a grieving mother."  Here's a link so you can judge for yourself. (link)

     Jayhan and Williams also point to facial similarities among many of the supposed 911 victims.  In the absence of other evidence, physical similarities prove nothing, but they do tend to support other evidence.  I checked the photos in a lot of sources other than Let's Roll Forums and found the similarities fascinating.

     The following audio clip is particularly compelling.  Gwendolyn Briley Strand, who claimed in a "documentary" called The Falling Man that her brother was killed at the World Trade Center, was in fact a paid actress.   I checked her web site and verified Jayhan's claims concerning her.
     It's surprising just how many people in the acting profession, and how many false witnesses (such as the "Harley Guy") have been wheeled out to support the official conspiracy theory concerning 911.

     Finally, there's the "911 Memorial Wall," as it is called.  That's the curious event of more than a thousand people spontaneously attaching "lost dog" style, have-you-seen-my-relative posters, contrary to common sense.  Oddly enough, most of them used the same kind of tape.
     From this observation, Jayhan and Williams take the position that very few people actually died at the World Trade Center that day.  That's where I definitely part company with their conclusions.  
     They present compelling evidence that fewer people died than was stated.  It doesn't naturally follow that no more than a few dozen people (my take on their remarks) died.  Judging from what evidence had to be presented for 1,600 of the death certificates issued that day, I'm convinced that at least that many people died in the attacks, mostly at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

     That's the last of the audio clips I've edited from four hours of interviews, but it's not likely to be the last of my remarks concerning the phantom victims of 911.  

     As far as justice is concerned, we blew it on the Kennedy Assassination.  Over the last 47 years, it has faded from a criminal case to a historical curiosity.  In those days, though, there was no Internet, and communication was slower.  

     Let's Roll Forums tends to steer clear of certain lines of inquiry that may be productive.  We shouldn't.  As long as the Internet remains free, and the citizens remain active and interested, we have the prospect of bringing the 911 criminals to justice.
Back to "The Phantom Victims of 9/11: Part 1"

 Other September 11, 2001, articles in this blog   
    

The Phantom Victims of 911

     In a previous article ("What Happened to Flight 77's Passengers?"), I presented compelling evidence that one of Flight 77's alleged passengers was still alive and had assumed a new identity.  In yet another article ("The Lion, the Witch, and the World Trade Center"), I proved beyond any reasonable doubt that some, and possibly all, of the videos of planes hitting the World Trade Center were computer-generated fakes.

     If no planes hit the World Trade Center or the Pentagon, then there were no passengers to be killed at the World Trade Center or the Pentagon.  What happened to the passengers?

     In an attempt to answer that question, at least in part, I've spent the past few weeks editing four hours of audio clips down to less than one hour.  I found them on a web site called Let's Roll Forums.  Jim Fetzer the host of a radio  program called The Real Deal interviews Phil Jayhan and Larry Williams, researchers for Let's Roll Forums.  

     In the following clip, they offer curious facts concerning alleged Flight 11 passenger (and billionaire donor to political causes) Sonia Morales Puopolo.   They repeat themselves in parts of the clips because my edited versions of the clips came from two interviews held a week apart.

     The researchers interviewed here take the position that some of the "victims" never existed, some faked their deaths and assumed new identities, some (Daniel Lewin comes to mind) were spies who were being reassigned, some had already died, and other fit other profiles.

     I believe that the researchers overstate their position by suggesting that very few people actually died in the faked 911 "attacks."  My take on their research is that at least 1,600 (out of the official count of almost 3,000) were killed that day, mostly at the World Trade Center towers and Building 7.  Jayhan and Williams seem to suggest that the actual victims number in the dozens at most.

     Regardless of the count, we agree that there were probably very many fake victims among the real ones.

     Don't accept or reject their ideas as complete packages.  Jayhan and Williams are researchers who have found something important and admit that they are still searching for answers, the same as many of the rest of us.  As likely as not, they are partly right, though they're likely mistaken in some areas. 

     Over the next few days, I intend to upload all of my edited versions of the interviews.  I encourage you to check out some of the articles on Let's Roll Forums.  If you do, do so with awareness that Let's Roll Forums is a collection of researchers who are bouncing facts and ideas around, sifting through them as well as they can, and who often disagree with one another.  They don't pretend to have definitive answers.  

     The search for truth and justice continues.  In the search for truth, skepticism is one of your most effective allies. 
Forward to "The Phantom Victims of 9/11: Part 2"

 Other September 11, 2001, articles in this blog   

     

Osama bin Laden was under House Arrest

     If you were the world's most wanted criminal and had to be able to flee at a moment's notice, how would anyone get that "moment's notice" to you? We're told that Osama bin Laden was living completely off the grid, with neither telephone nor Internet connection. (link)

     Wasn't bin Laden in need of frequent kidney dialysis? How would he reach a doctor in case of emergency, and why couldn't he be tracked down by way of doctors who gave house calls for dialysis treatment?

     If he was living completely off the grid, how did he contact his henchmen all over the world to do their dastardly deeds? The way I hear it, he put out more videos, audios, and other electronic messages than a rock star. His henchmen were everywhere, taking directions from him: in tourist areas, in synagogues, and under children's beds at night or in their closets, to mention a few.

     According to Michael Bunker, the author of Surviving off the Grid, it wasn't possible for bin Laden to do all he was accused of doing and still be off the grid, unless he had major help from high-level sources in government.  (link)

     Bunker's explanation fits most, but not all, the known facts. His theory doesn't answer my next question: Would the world's most dangerous terrorist be unarmed?

     Another explanation better fits the facts as we know the facts. Osama bin Laden was under house arrest and was killed at the most politically opportune time. As for the failure of Pakistan's intelligence service ISI to find bin Laden, the ISI had thought that he was dead. In a David Frost interview conducted shortly before the death of Benazir Bhutto, she mentioned that bin Laden had been murdered a few years earlier. Thus, the ISI had no reason to look for bin Laden.  (video)

     Let's take a quick look at the history of Osama bin Laden.

     The bin Laden family has close economic and political ties to the family of George H. W. Bush.

     The economic connection comes by way of the Carlyle Group, a global asset management fund founded in 1987 by William Conway, Daniel D'Aniello, and David Rubenstein. The Bush family are major investors, as were (until after 2001) the bin Laden family. The Bush and bin Laden families also shared ventures in the oil business.  There are yet other shared business connections between the two families.
     With Central Intelligence Agency funding and guidance, bin Laden left college in 1979 to become a leader in the mujahideen fighting against the Soviets in Afghanistan. He continued to be a CIA asset throughout the Ronald Reagan Administration, at least until 1989. Bear in mind that then-Vice President Bush had been a CIA director and maintained close ties to the Agency. Regardless of whether al Qaeda exists as an organization, or a database, or in some other form, there's no question but that it was—and possibly still is—a CIA operation.

     During that same period—that is, from 1979 through 1989—the U.S. government created, funded, and guided the Taliban. Jimmy Carter's National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski openly boasted about having created the Taliban. Brzezinski is now a top foreign policy adviser for Barack Obama.

     Did Osama bin Laden continue in his role as a CIA asset?

     In 1997, a neoconservative think tank called the Project for the New American Century described a vision for the future that reads eerily like a blueprint for the world as we've seen it since September 11, 2001. They lamented that their dream would be very slow becoming a reality unless they were blessed with "a new Pearl Harbor." They got their wish on September 11, 2001.  For the free PDF download of the PNAC blueprint, click here.

     In 1998, Zbigniew Brzezinski, who had created the Taliban, laid out a strategy for world conquest in his book The Grand Chessboard. Of course, none of this strategy could become more than a pipe dream absent the "new Pearl Harbor."  He, too, got his wish. Are we to believe that all this time, money, and energy was spent on mere fantasies that coincidentally became realities? Is that the way that highly intelligent, educated, rich, and otherwise successful people spend their resources?  For the free PDF download of The Grand Chessboard, .click here.

     I won't go into the issues surrounding Insider complicity in the events of September 11, 2001. There are plenty of other articles and sites that make a solid case for this accusation.

     Given all these facts, and given the strong indicators that bin Laden enjoyed the protection of powerful Insiders, there is more than ample reason to suspect that bin Laden continued to be under the control of intelligence agencies. The high level of security surrounding his compound in Pakistan wasn't just to keep people out; it was also to keep bin Laden in.

     A final question remains: Why was Osama bin Laden killed?

     Only two days before the raid, Barack Obama and NATO were taking flak for a raid in Libya—the one in which the son and grandchildren of Moammar Gadhafi were killed. Under international law, it's a war crime to target civilians for a military attack. When a United States SEAL team did the same thing to Osama bin Laden, most people thought it was great, and the murder of Gadhafi's grandchildren slipped down a memory hole.

     What a dashing way to begin a presidential election campaign!
(Note: A person writing to the Huffington Post seems to have scooped me on this one because I was a bit slow in completing this article.  On May 2, a writer called Nastywolf commented that he suspected that Pakistan had been keeping bin Laden under house arrest and was hoping to hold him for some opportune moment; but that the U.S. "stepped in and ruined their game." (link) The theory that the U.S. and Pakistan were doublecrossing each other in this matter is interesting indeed.)